Memory Alpha:Pages for deletion/Seb's Raw Takes
Forum:Entry for Seb's Raw Takes Hello Everybody: I was just looking here on MA and I see that TrekMovie.com has an entry here and thought it would be good if someone wanted to do one for my blog, Seb's Raw Takes. You might have heard a bit about it recently as I interview people who have worked on Star Trek and have released DVD commentaries for all of the TNG films. I didn't think it would be proper to do my own entry but I would be happy to advise whoever might like to so the information is correct. Please check out my memory-alpha profile for more information about who I am. -Sebastian. --SebastianProoth 12:23, 7 May 2007 (UTC) Now that it is created... It would have been nice if someone responded to the forum before this was created. Personally, I don't think MA should be used for self promotion, otherwise we would have had a page on already. At best I think this, as well as The Trek Movie Report, should be reported as external links, just as EAS is. --Alan 10:18, 13 May 2007 (UTC) :I would agree, it would have been nice. But in creating this, it is not self promotion. It is simple facts. My links are welcome on the articles about the crew here on MA, why shouldn't there be a tiny article about why the links are there? I didn't say "Thsi si a great website that you should all visit" ...just the facts. --SebastianProoth 10:22, 13 May 2007 (UTC) ::It would be hard differentiating between pages that "should" have a page here and pages that shouldn't - where would you draw the line? If we created even tiny pages about the different websites that may be of use (Ex astris, the verious transcript sites we use all the time, the news sites etc) it would be nothing more but a collection of Star Trek links. The only page I can think of that really should have an entry at MA is StarTrek.com. In order to enforce a clear policy about that, I'd say we have to delete this page as well as The Trek Movie Report entry. --Jörg 10:25, 13 May 2007 (UTC) :So you think that it is somehow wrong to have an article about a website that has current Star Trek interviews? That talks about Star Trek XI...(Both TrekMovie.com and SebRT.com share that commonality) If I wasn't producing these interviews for the community...I would not have bothered with the article about SebRT.com. I am not looking for Star Trek notoriety. Do what you want. This is the second time here on MA that the admins have rejected my work as worthless.--SebastianProoth 10:30, 13 May 2007 (UTC) ::First of all I wanna stress: Nobody has rejected your work as worthless or said anything bad about your work, not on this page or on any other. The links to the interviews you conducted are all still on the pages of the interviewee and are worthy and intersting additions to their pages. ::I think we don't need a page about sites that report about the latest Star Trek XI news, when we have a page, , that summarizes all the news from the various sites and has links to the individual sites, articles, updates etc. --Jörg 10:37, 13 May 2007 (UTC) :I think you make a valid argument. I do agree that information is collated on the Star Trek XI page but when you think about, the stuff Anthony Pascale (trekmovie.com) and I do are among some of the only Star Trek stuff being created, besides the work of StarTrek.com, Trekweb, TrekToday, Ex Astris Scientia...and I think they all deserve mention here. Who runs them...they are keeping trek alive.. :And as for dismissing my work as worthless, when I made moves to add a link to the only audio commentary available for Star Trek Insurrection (mine) it was removed with gusto, stating that "if everyone added their links there would be loads" or something to that effect. There are no other full length commentaries for Insurrection besides mine and whoever deleted the link probably didn't even listen to it. If they had done, they might have found it is probably worth leaving a link for other fans to hear. That is called dismissal in my eyes. :We are all on the same side here...I just think that in addition to mine, these Star Trek websites of note should be...Star Trek websites of note..here.--SebastianProoth 10:42, 13 May 2007 (UTC) ::Yes, but how do we decide which pages are of note? Of note to whom? When is a page noteworthy enough to create a page at MA? For example, for many users of MA, the three pages that are of most note are , because many users get their screenshots from there, Chakoteya's transcript site, because they can check, what was mentioned in which episode there, and because the TNG and DS9 scripts can be read there. ::As to the two pages in question at the moment, trekmovie.com and your page: all links concerning Star Trek XI and TOS remastered can be found on the relevant pages at MA. Links to your interviews with the production people are welcome and have been added to the relevant pages, and kept there. As to your podcasts: Even if there are no official ones for Star Trek: Insurrection or many episodes of the various series: There is no need to link those podcasts. Any observations you made, fun trivia about episodes etc can be added on the background sections of the movies and episodes (everything except for nitpicks, that is). Everything else that naturally comes with a podcast, a commentary, a review is not allowed here on MA: personal opinion, critique. It doesn't matter if this is proclaimed in audio or written text form, those are simply our policies which we the admins try to enforce. --Jörg 11:01, 13 May 2007 (UTC) :::Now that this has been discussed here as well as on IRC, my personal preference is that both this page and The Trek Movie Report be deleted. As Alan pointed out on IRC, we're an encyclopedia, not a website directory. My original suggestion was to include these sites (as well as as sites like Ex Astris, TrekNation, etc.) on a single page and limit that page to sites with "connections" – meaning sites whose operators have contact with Trek cast and crew and use them to post news and interviews. This idea doesn't appear to be favorable, so the only other option is to delete the articles, with the official website (StarTrek.com) being the only website capable of having its own article. --From Andoria with Love 22:58, 13 May 2007 (UTC) Pages for deletion This is a page to discuss the suggestion to delete " ". *If you are suggesting a page for deletion, add your initial rationale to the section "Deletion rationale". *If you want to discuss this suggestion, add comments to the section "Discussion". *If a consensus has been reached, an administrator will explain the final decision in the section "Admin resolution". In all cases, please make sure to read and understand the deletion policy before editing this page. Deletion rationale This page should be deleted now that the policy against articles on unofficial websites has been implemented. --From Andoria with Love 13:21, 18 May 2007 (UTC) Discussion * Delete --Alan 12:14, 23 May 2007 (UTC) Admin resolution *'Deleted'. --From Andoria with Love 00:37, 24 May 2007 (UTC)